CO129-296 - Public Offices & Others - 1899 — Page 289

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

"London 1st April 1839

My dear Sir Mancherjee

283

As far as we know the charge on which Attar Singh has been dismissed is that he gave a loan to Da Rocha. He admits that he was present at the transaction when Ganda Singh gave a loan to Dalocha. This he denies.

It is contended that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to prevent the transaction which was not a breach of no rule.

# This is entirely confirmed:

1st: by Stanton's statement: he says that Da Rocha was not a constable at all but a telephone clerk in the civil service, not under the police ordinance nor to the rules and regulations, and that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to stop the transaction.

2nd: by the fact that Darocha has not been dismissed. With reference to both these, see Stanton's statement.

I think this is extremely important and I send this in duplicate and annexure in order that if you think well, you may add a copy of it to the memorandum, or if it is already with the Colonial Secretary, a copy of this letter may be handed to him for his kind consideration.

The non-dismissal of Da Rocha, which was noted in the Continuation as remarkable (on the supposition that Da Rocha was guilty, at least equally to blame), would, if Attar Singh is innocent, be an additional argument of the greatest weight, in favour of Attar Singh's innocence.

If Da Rocha was not a constable, Attar Singh did nothing wrong in being present at the giving of the loan.

Page 284


(text on the back of this sheet is not provided)

Edit History

2026-05-31 15:33:07 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct
Live
View comparison
AI Proofread
"London 1st April 1839 My dear Sir Mancherjee 283 As far as we know the charge on which Attar Singh has been dismissed is that he gave a loan to Da Rocha. He admits that he was present at the transaction when Ganda Singh gave a loan to Dalocha. This he denies. It is contended that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to prevent the transaction which was not a breach of no rule. # This is entirely confirmed: 1st: by Stanton's statement: he says that Da Rocha was not a constable at all but a telephone clerk in the civil service, not under the police ordinance nor to the rules and regulations, and that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to stop the transaction. 2nd: by the fact that Darocha has not been dismissed. With reference to both these, see Stanton's statement. I think this is extremely important and I send this in duplicate and annexure in order that if you think well, you may add a copy of it to the memorandum, or if it is already with the Colonial Secretary, a copy of this letter may be handed to him for his kind consideration. The non-dismissal of Da Rocha, which was noted in the Continuation as remarkable (on the supposition that Da Rocha was guilty, at least equally to blame), would, if Attar Singh is innocent, be an additional argument of the greatest weight, in favour of Attar Singh's innocence. If Da Rocha was not a constable, Attar Singh did nothing wrong in being present at the giving of the loan. Page 284 (text on the back of this sheet is not provided)
Baseline (Original)
I ( Copy ) " London 1st: April 1839 My dear Sir Mancherjee " 283 As far as we know the charge on which attar Singh has been dismissed is that he gave a loan to DaRocha He admits that he was present at the ta This he denies · transaction when Ganda Singh gave a loan to Dalocha It is contended that it was not Attar Singh's duty to a breach of no rule nterfere to prevent the transaction which was # This is entirely confirmed :- not 1st: by Stanton's statement: he says that Da Rocha was not constable at all but a telephone clerk in the civil service enable to thepolice ordinance nor to the rules and regulations and that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to stop her it e transaction :- 28: by the fact that Dañocha has not been dismissed With reference to both these see Stanton's statement : dexed I think this is extrememly important ter and annexure in duplicate and I send this J in order that if you think well may add a copy of it to the memorandum : or if it is already with b with annexure Colonial Secretary, a copy of this letter may be handed to him Continuation for his kină consideration The non-dismissal of DaRocha which was noted in the + " as remarkable (on the supposition that Da Rocha was was guilty at least equally to blame ) would 9 if Attar in this view an additional argument of the greatest weight, in favour of Attar 's innocence le · DaRocha was not dismissed because he was not a con- If he was not a constable, Attar Singh did nothing wrong in present at the giving of the loan (ave back of this hot
2026-05-31 15:33:07 · Baseline
View content

I

( Copy )

"

London 1st: April

1839

My dear Sir Mancherjee

"

283

As far as we know the charge on which

attar Singh has been dismissed is that he gave a loan to DaRocha

He admits that he was present at the ta

This he denies

·

transaction when Ganda Singh gave a loan to Dalocha

It is contended that it was not Attar Singh's duty to

a breach of no rule

nterfere to prevent the transaction which was

# This is entirely confirmed :-

not

1st: by Stanton's statement: he says that Da Rocha was not constable at all but a telephone clerk in the civil service enable to thepolice ordinance nor to the rules and regulations

and that it was not Attar Singh's duty to interfere to stop

her it

e transaction :-

28:

by the fact that Dañocha has not been dismissed With reference to both these see Stanton's statement

:

dexed

I think this is extrememly important ter and annexure in duplicate

and I send this

J

in order that

if you think well

may add a copy of it to the memorandum :

or if it is already with b with annexure

Colonial Secretary, a copy of this letter may be handed to him Continuation for his kină consideration

The non-dismissal of DaRocha which was noted in the

+

"

as remarkable (on the supposition that Da Rocha was was guilty at least equally to blame ) would

9

if

Attar

in this view

an additional argument of the greatest weight, in favour of Attar

's innocence

le

·

DaRocha was not dismissed because he was not a con-

If he was not a constable, Attar Singh did nothing wrong in

present at the giving of the loan

(ave back of this hot

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.